City of Newberne v. . Jones
Supreme Court of North Carolina
ACTION for a penalty under a city by-law, tried before Thomas, J., at Craven. Spring Term 1869. The action began by summons before a magistrate, charging the defendant with violation of a city by-law in regard to tying horses to shade trees within its limits. The complaint set forth elaborately the right of the plaintiff to bring the action, and the answer set up as a defence, at length, the claim of other parties to be the rightful citygov-ernment.
Read the full summary
ACTION for a penalty under a city by-law, tried before Thomas, J., at Craven. Spring Term 1869. The action began by summons before a magistrate, charging the defendant with violation of a city by-law in regard to tying horses to shade trees within its limits. The complaint set forth elaborately the right of the plaintiff to bring the action, and the answer set up as a defence, at length, the claim of other parties to be the rightful citygov-ernment. Judgment before the magistrate was given for the plaintiff; but in the Superior Court this was reversed, and the plaintiff appealed. The manner…
1Opinion of the Court
Settle J.
It is obvious that the purpose of this action is to1 obtain a decision as to the rights of the two parties who claim the powers of government in “the City of Newberne.”
However desirable it may be to have the question settled, we think that we are cut off from a consideration of the merits, by a motion which has)been^submitted in the cause.
When the case was called, Mr. Green presented himself and •claimed to be the Attorney of “The City ofNewberne,” insist. ing that this appeared from the record of the case now before the Court. Mr. Seymour, with whom was Mr. Haughton, moved the Court…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Henderson v. HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- Atlantic, Tennessee & Ohio Railroad v. JohnstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874